2019
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkz459
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microhomologies are prevalent at Cas9-induced larger deletions

Abstract: The CRISPR system is widely used in genome editing for biomedical research. Here, using either dual paired Cas9D10A nickases or paired Cas9 nuclease we characterize unintended larger deletions at on-target sites that frequently evade common genotyping practices. We found that unintended larger deletions are prevalent at multiple distinct loci on different chromosomes, in cultured cells and mouse embryos alike. We observed a high frequency of microhomologies at larger deletion breakpoint junctions, suggesting t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

14
112
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(126 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
14
112
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our findings highlight the need for technologies that reliably detect all unwanted OnTE. Standard quality controls broadly performed in the field such as genotyping or karyotyping will only detect small events restricted to genotyping amplicons, or very large chromosomal aberrations, such as megabase-sized deletions, translocations and inversions, but miss the CRISPR-induced OnTE we and others revealed 5,7,8,11,15 . Moreover, high density SNP arrays faithfully detect only larger deletions, inversions and LOH, as their reliability increases with the number of affected SNPs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Our findings highlight the need for technologies that reliably detect all unwanted OnTE. Standard quality controls broadly performed in the field such as genotyping or karyotyping will only detect small events restricted to genotyping amplicons, or very large chromosomal aberrations, such as megabase-sized deletions, translocations and inversions, but miss the CRISPR-induced OnTE we and others revealed 5,7,8,11,15 . Moreover, high density SNP arrays faithfully detect only larger deletions, inversions and LOH, as their reliability increases with the number of affected SNPs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…However, application of CRISPR can be hampered by unwanted off-and on-target effects 3,4 . Recent studies in mice have described frequent occurrences of large deletions and complex rearrangements at CRISPR-edited loci after repair by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) [5][6][7][8] . It is currently unclear if such alterations also affect clinically relevant human cells such as iPSCs, because repair pathways involved in CRISPR editing are differentially regulated 9 , as indicated for example by shorter human gene conversion tracts 2 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Efficient exon deletion approaches implement CRISPR/Cas9 targeting of introns 5 and 3 of the target exon [38,39]. The distal DSB ends are subsequently repaired via classical EJ and alternative EJ repair pathways [15,25,73], frequently leading to highly efficient, homogenous indel outcomes. This is particularly true on the RNA level [39].…”
Section: Exon Deletionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, the characterisation of mutant alleles in mosaic founders is particularly challenging. Events that are not captured by the chosen assays can be omitted (Shin et al, 2017;Kosicki et al, 2018;Owens et al, 2019) and screening can sometimes fail to distinguish rearranged from correct alleles in these complex animals (Codner et al, 2018). This suggests that the screen based on Sanger sequencing produced some false positives.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%